University  of  California  •  Berkeley 


OFFICE  OF  THE 

INDIAN  RIGHTS  ASSOCIATION, 

1305  ARCH  STREET, 

PHILADELPHIA,  April,  1890. 


From  the  New  York  Tribune,  April  4th,  1890. 

THE  UTE  INDIANS. 

WHY  PEOPLE  IN  COLORADO  WANT  THEM  TO  BE  REMOVED. 

DENVER,  COL.,  April  3d  (Special). — When  Governer  Cooper 
remarked  to  the  Tribune  correspondent  a  few  days  ago  that  the 
reason  he  favored  the  removal  of  the  Ute  Indians  was  because 
he  wanted  them  out  of  the  State,  he  summed  up  the  philosophy 
of  the  situation.  Such  is  the  only  excuse  that  can  be  given  by 
any  Coloradoan.  During  the  last  few  days,  your  correspondent 
has  met  residents  of  all  portions  of  Colorado,  and  in  every 
instance  they  desired  the  Indians  removed — out  of  feelings  of 
malice  and  the  usual  race  prejudice.  As  far  as  the  Indians 
themselves  are  concerned,  it  makes  but  little  difference  to  them 
how  often  they  are  asked  to  change  their  place  of  residence. 
This  is  accounted  for  by  the  bribes  offered  by  the  commissioners 
when  appointed  and  fairy  tales  sung  in  their  ears.  It  is  a  notice 
able  fact  that  the  Southern  Utes  have  taken  no  interest  whatever 
in  their  present  reservation,  owing  to  the  uncertainty  as  to  how 
long  they  will  be  allowed  to  remain.  In  case  they  are  removed 
to  Utah,  in  less  than  a  year  the  Territorial  Legislature  will  be 
petitioning  Congress  to  move  them  into  Arizona,  while  that 
Territory  will  never  be  satisfied  until  they  are  dumped  into  the 
Pacific. 

Among  the  more  prominent  preachers  in  Denver  is  the  Rev. 
H.  H.  Beach,  who  has  spent  many  years  in  Southern  Colorado, 
and  is  conversant  on  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  Utes.  Mr. 
Beach  is  at  the  present  time  pastor  of  one  of  the  principal 
churches  here,  and  recently  directed  a  letter  to  Commissioner 
Morgan,  opposing  the  proposed  removal.  As  this  letter  attracted 
considerable  attention  among  the  Denver  newspapers,  its  writer 


has  handed  to  the  Tribune  correspondent  the  following  com 
munication  : — 

"I  need  not  claim  an  extraordinary  acquaintance  with  the 
Southern  Utes.  Facts  commonly  and  well  known  East  and 
West  not  only  justify  the  severest  condemnation  of  the  effort  to 
remove  them  to  Utah,  but  call  for  the  protest  of  every  man  who 
sympathizes  with  the  weak  and  misused.  I  refer  to  such  facts 
as  these :  — 

"  i.  A  fair  proportion  of  the  Utes  have  dug  irrigating  ditches, 
even  the  women  and  children  engaging  in  the  work,  and  other 
wise  improved  themselves  farms,  established  comfortable  homes 
and  adopted  many  of  the  customs  of  civilized  life.  Of  course 
it  may  be  said  that  they  neither  form  home  attachments  nor 
value  property  as  we  do,  and  so  may,  in  perfect  justice,  be 
frightened  and  reduced  to  the  wilderness;  but  I  would  not  give 
the  statement  much  weight. 

"  2.  Only  a  small  proportion,  the  more  indolent  and  vicious, 
such  a  class  as  curses  every  community,  was  at  first  willing  to  go. 
It  was  notoriously  difficult  for  the  commissioners  to  gain  the  con 
sent  of  the  people.  And  what  were  the  arguments  and  means 
by  which  they  at  last  accomplished  it?  Such  as  make  every 
loyal  Coloradoan  blush — appeals  to  barbarous  instincts,  the  very 
elements  of  character  that  every  magnanimous  man  would  sub 
due  in  them,  bribery  and  broad  hints  of  encroachment,  perhaps 
another  war  (?)  and  the  eventual  loss  of  their  property,  their 
homes  and  their  lives.  Are  we  bandits?  Adair  Wilson  and 
Denver  newspapers,  particularly  The  Sundown  Chestnut,  need 
not  wonder  that  unbiased  people  of  New  York  and  Boston  fail 
to  feel  the  force  of  the  argument  that  the  Utes  very  generally 
consented  to  removal.  History  repeats  itself.  A  portion,  at 
least,  of  the  Cherokees,  in  1835,  consented,  but  their  removal 
proves  to  be  an  indelible  stain,  not  only  on  Georgia,  but  on  the 
whole  country.  The  highwayman  gains  the  consent  of  his 
victims. 

"3.  We  want  the  reservation  for  ourselves.  We  covet  those 
ranches  and  the  whole  Territory.  l  School  lands  will  not  last 
'forever.  Out  with  the  Utes. '  <  But  .  .  .  they  are  lazy  and 
low-lived. '  Have  the  men  who  tolerate  the  low  streets  of  Denver, 
the  saloons,  the  gambling  dens,  the  many  houses  of  iniquity,  and 


the  Greasers  of  Archuleta  and  Conejos  Counties  grown  suddenly 
virtuous?  Let  us  hope  so.  But  cupidity  is  too  evident,  and, 
besides,  the  proposed  removal  is  not  reformatory. 

"Is  anybody  [distressed  because  one  citizen  of  Colorado  has 
spoken  a  word  or  two  in  behalf  of  these  poor  creatures  ?  Have 
we  not  more  reason  to  feel  distressed  that  the  human  sentiments 
of  thousands  of  citizens  have  not  found  utterance  loud  enough 
to  ring  throughout  all  the  land?  If  one  or  forty  could  prevent 
the  consummation  of  a  heartless  scheme  they  might,  I  think, 
enjoy  the  consciousness  of  having  saved  their  State  another 
disgrace." 

What  Colorado  lacks  is  more  candid  and  outspoken  men  like 
Mr.  Beach. 


